France, UK and most of Europe are part of NATO and in recent days have sent small military forces to Greenland to show that, unlike the US, they will honour their alliances.

Trump is trying to break NATO because it’s what daddy Putin wants him to do.

It doesn’t really make sense to. The idea of a sending a token force is to act as trip-wire. A trip-wire force is there so if they’re attacked, it means war. In that case, those soldiers would be reinforced. They’re the tip of the spear.

If Canada sent a trip-wire force in Greenland, those soldiers would not be be expecting reinforcements if attacked by the US. Because Canada is on the border with the US there would be fighting much closer to the aggressor than where the trip-wire forces are. So it would be sending soldiers to Greenland and telling them if attacked by the US they will die with no hope of reinforcement.

You put trip-wires on your outer defenses between you and your enemy. You don’t put them far away from the front-lines of a potential conflict. Doing that is just telling soldiers to either die or surrender if attacked.

Remember they’re soldiers not some pawns on a chessboard that you sacrifice for a phony political statement. Really what would be the plan to reinforce Canadian soldiers sent to Greenland if they were attacked by US forces?

It’s not even former allies. Denmark is a current ally according to treaties that are signed into US law. Sure the US is effectively no longer part of NATO but all of the official reasons for invading Greenland could be accomplished by Trump admitting some agreements made by past Presidents were actually good.

This is all because one deranged old child molester wants to put his name on the map and a whole bunch of people are too gutless to admit that’s what’s going on.

Stop trying to make BRICS happen it’s not going to happen.

Also it sounds like you want BRICS to be a group of country where they don’t have freedom of speech? Why would this be a good thing?

It’s just all emotion and no rational thought now. People just go into outrage mode when certain topics are mentioned.

Really it opens a channel to criticize ICE without needing to logon to X to do so. But that’s bad because preventing communication is good?

Of course I doubt ICE will care about criticism directed towards their account on bluesky. But that means things said on the internet don’t have much of an effect on things, which means it doesn’t matter whether they’re on bluesky (or any other forum).

Mostly it’s about some weird belief by some about controlling what is being said on the internet gains power. You’d think the events that have happened would have proven this wrong, but still people continue to be upset about things being said on the internet and want some power over those things.

Really words on the internet don’t matter as much as people think, and the idea of blocking unwanted information is annoying at best and can lead to ignorance. What matters is the horrible acts ICE is doing. We should want more light being shown on them, and welcome any potential channel of discussion.

Wanting to prevent discussion indicates you feel you’re in the wrong. ICE is indicating they want discussion, while those that are outraged by ICE being on bluesky are indicating they don’t want discussion on ICE. Why would anyone want to make is seem ICE is in the right while they’re in the wrong? It’s people not thinking and only reacting emotionally and handing ICE a W because they are raging instead of thinking.

Pressure politics is part of diplomacy.

That being said, the US effectively doesn’t have any allies any more. Sure there’s still alliances on paper, but Trump doesn’t care about agreements and everyone knows it. But we’re in a bit of an awkward dance where countries don’t want Trump to know that they know the US no longer considers any country an ally. Just buying time to shift everything away from the US.

Yeah handing over all media institutions over to government control worked well for Russia, didn’t it?

You know the internet isn’t all that difficult to control. How many tech CEOs are licking Trump’s boot right now? Jeff Bezos being among them should indicate the problems with tech, not the problems with media institutions.

And you think your shitty alt media sites couldn’t be made irrelevant by tech CEOs with just a few tweaks of the algorithms? Do you think they can’t send their government agents to wreck a small time journalist?

In the past the owner of a newspaper would stand up for journalistic freedom. This particular newspaper is owned by a big tech guy, so that isn’t happening. So your solution is to get rid of newspapers and trust in big tech more? I think the influence of big tech has you reading the situation all wrong.

Trump is threatening tarrifs. Must be a day that ends with a Y.

You believe Russian asset Tusli Gabbard over the IAEA, the UN nuclear watchdog?

Doesn’t that make it even all the more worse? People dying in wars started by a deranged child molester. A country would rather have a war against their allies and go down in history as the greatest betrayers in history rather than admit their leader is a child molester and remove him from power.

You need the cabinet to invoke the 25th anyway. That’s not going to happen.

A Paradox game for Trump? I think a map colouring book would be more on his level.

You either die a hero that made Dilbert or live long enough to become a racist villain.

Sure… but I don’t think there’s any particular malice towards people that build PCs. Just greed and incompetence. Gotta buy up GPUs that there isn’t enough electricity to run to drive up the share prices!

But when the bubble bursts and hardware gets cheap, is that something we’d considered to be goodwill towards people building PCs? Or will it just be a side-benefit of incompetence?

Just ebbs and flows of incompetence to me.

That implies there’s some thought behind this. Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by incompetence.

But what’s the point of it then?

I guess if you have multiple computers you can access the files from either computers. But for people that just have one computer the whole thing seems kinda useless. And then MS forces people to use this product they have no need for by holding their computer ransom. People don’t want their files on One Drive, they only have it because MS forced it upon them.

This is like forcing a passenger to fly a 747 and then saying “well the plane crashed because of pilot error” and ignoring the fact that someone was forced some to be behind the controls of something they understand against their will.

For a home user, a backup service or just a way to share files actually makes more sense than something that mindlessly syncs file actions, including deletes. One Drive could be useful if it were what people expect it to be. As it is, it’s useless for most people, and bad on them for thinking MS One Drive was a useful product I guess.

Who else just did a search on the Epstein files for “Tim Sweeney”?

I didn’t find anything on jmail, but there’s still a lot that haven’t been released, and a lot of stuff is still redacted.

Oops wrong shitposter. Y’all say the same kinds of things. Which one were you again? Are you a leftist/MAGA that doesn’t know anything about politics/economics?

Whatever… y’all carry water for Trump and attack those that oppose him. Does it really really matter your rationalizations are at this point?

Your country is going off the rails and you’re sitting around doing nothing other than shit posting about it on the internet because you expect other people to solve your problems for you.

Who’s really the entitled one here?

I’m not American, but I’m guessing you are. You’re the one that posted the image and did the MAGA “I was only joking bro” bullshit.